Boys are “snips and snails and puppy dog tails.” — English Poet Robert Southby, 1774-1843

“In New England, the HR recruiters tend to be more flexible and sympathetic to minorities and women, but will tend to assume the worst for a white male.” — J.T. O’Donnell, Inc. Magazine, 2017

“Two wrongs don’t make a right.” — One of the most prevalent “Momilies” of all time.

What is the quickest sure-fire method of achieving diversity in any organization?

Don’t hire or severely restrict employing those of the coarser gender with a light-skin hue. Undesirable gender and ethnicity demographics are not required today, and they will not be needed tomorrow.

This undeniable conclusion is a leading, not a trailing indicator. Just examine any employment application with its de rigueur demographic questionnaire. The questions asked and the answers wanted send an ominous message to the Anglo male of the species.

Absolutely zero diversity points are awarded for hiring pale males.

There are most likely two chances the light-hue hombre will be hired for highly competitive positions: Slim and none — and “Slim” is out of town. To be more accurate, an Anglo male can be employed as a last resort, particularly in undesirable locales (e.g., Ellensburg, WA), where women and people of other ethnicities are simply not available.

There is zero upside in hiring Anglo males in today’s enlightened society, particularly those on the mature side of one’s 45th birthday. Better yet no one will ever be offended by the deliberate and systematic non-hiring of pale males. There are no CNN or MSNBC recriminations whatsoever when it comes to this acceptable modern-day discrimination.

Going to fight this one out in court in this prevailing political climate? Good luck.

After all, 45-of-America’s-46 presidents came from a particular demographic gender and ethnicity. The only answer is to redress this shocking historical inequality. Would electing a woman president (e.g., former UN Ambassador and Governor Nikki Haley) be an appropriate response instead of blacklisting Anglo males?

Sorry guys, you are now being penalized for your birth-gender and ethnicity and no one seems to care or will ever care. You have benefitted from the privilege of winning (now losing?) the biological lottery. Put a fork in these sorry creations. You’re done.

Before being subjected to a vast array ugly allegations, please let Almost DailyBrett state ex-cathedra that your author supports the goal of diversity. Let me repeat: This author wholeheartedly supports the goal of diversity.

Everyone should be afforded an equal opportunity to compete and win the trophy based on their skills, education and capabilities being the best fit for the position. If this successful candidate helps achieve the attainment of diversity, that’s a bonus.

Alas, not everyone receives a trophy in the true game of life.

Your author must take a nanosecond and ask: ‘Does today’s diversity apply to everyone?’ Or is this campaign a way of achieving retribution? If women were denied the right to vote until 1919 or Alabama’s Bull Connor turned loose the dogs, is that the responsibility of today’s Anglo males?

Should there be a nationwide moratorium or at least a severe curtailment of the hiring of pale males for the indefinite future until total and complete gender, orientation and racial harmony is achieved? Who will decide when the time has come to rescind this discriminatory edict?

Punishing Those With Privilege By Those With New Privilege?

Look at thus chorus of entitled white men, justifying a serial rapist’s (e.g., US Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh) arrogated entitlement. All of them deserve miserable deaths while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps. Bonus: we castrate their corpses and feed them to the swine? Yes.” — Georgetown University Professor Christine Fair practicing “Academic Freedom”

Even though their stories are anecdotal and do not constitute an empirical trend, Almost DailyBrett is hearing with increasing frequency tales from maturing Anglo men who studied, graduated, climbed the career ladder and achieved, only to discover their path forward is essentially blocked. And there is very little they can do about it.

Will they be put out to pasture prematurely because of demographic factors they cannot remedy in The Land of Opportunity? Certainly this result has happened to others in the history of our society, right up to the present day. Indeed, two wrongs do not make a right.

“There are two paths to go by, but in the long run, there’s no way to change the road you’re on” (with apologies to Robert Plant and Jimmy Page).

During your author’s days as press secretary to former California Governor George Deukmejian rarely did a week go by when a reporter wouldn’t call and announce we were not appointing as many women and minorities as our predecessor, Governor Jerry Brown (first two-terms).

Our reply would always be: ‘We strive for diversity. We will not appoint someone solely for her or his gender or ethnicity (that’s an insult to the appointee). We will select the best person for the job, while aiming for diversity.’

Translated everyone, who is qualified will be considered, and that includes both genders and all ethnicities in California’s rich melting pot. Amen.

That’s the way it should be.

Mature Anglo males biggest problems are becoming increasingly difficult to solve: They are essentially the wrong gender. They are the undesirable ethnicity. Many are the wrong age (e.g., more than 45 in Silicon Valley). They will never be cool.

Certainly, there have been empirically researched, discussed and legislated remedies for redressing historic wrongs imparted on women and people of color. Some of these injustices are still occurring and must be stopped.

Is blacklisting millions of a particular gender and ethnicity demographic in order to achieve “diversity” the best way to provide opportunities for all?